Enquirer lacks merit for letters screens

Thank you to the Enquirer for proving the point of my recent letter, which is that the editorial staff makes no effort to review items published for journalistic merit, factual accuracy or logical analysis.

The rebuttal by R.L. Closson, excepting his or her self described experience in providing security training, contains nothing of fact nor any logical argument to refute anything in my letter.

Specifically: If five million rounds are used in training each year as Closson states, the two billion rounds for which DHS has contracted would last 400 years.

This appears excessive and the government claim of purchasing for bulk discounts is ludicrous.

Closson claims the great benefit of "shoot and don't shoot" drills, and I don't disagree.

What neither Closson, nor DHS has adequately explained is the need for "shoot" targets depicting pregnant women, young mothers, children and bathrobed senior citizens in their kitchen?

Yes, those targets are not depicting bystanders; they depict these persons as the armed menace to be shot. There is something seriously wrong here.

Closson can take offense because I do not live in the same brainwashed, delusional state of mind that believes our government is operating righteously to protect us from those evil, but to date non-existent, terrorists, but the "ill informed" label is on Closson, not myself.

Also, for the record, I am an honorably discharged veteran Naval officer with 14 plus years of service, and I don't appreciate speculative statements to the contrary made by people who don't know what they are talking about.

Ray Otto

East Leroy

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Email this article

Enquirer lacks merit for letters screens

Thank you to the Enquirer for proving the point of my recent letter, which is that the editorial staff makes no effort to review items published for journalistic merit, factual accuracy or logical